SPORTING SHOOTERS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA INC.
MEDIA RELEASE
14 JULY 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SSAA says calls for more gun laws ignores the real problem
The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia Inc. said today that recent
calls by the New South Wales Greens and the Coalition For Gun Control for an
overhaul of the state's gun laws in the wake of the recent murder-suicide in
Gresford, was grossly opportunistic and ignored the real mental health
issues underpinning suicide.
SSAA spokesperson Roy Smith, said that what was needed were not more gun
laws, but a review of the state's mental health services and the way in
which people with psychological problems are dealt with. Mr Smith went on
to say "It's obvious that whether or not this person had access to firearms
would have made little difference to the outcome.
The fact is he stabbed his wife, suffocated his children and only then
misused a firearm to harm himself. If he hadn't had access to the gun it's
quite likely that he would have used some other means."
Mr Smith described those calling for a review of the state's firearm laws as
misguided. "Unfortunately, these types of incidents encourage certain
groups out of the woodwork. These then attempt to hitch their particular
agenda to the tragedy and in so doing they divert attention away from the
real issue, which in this case is mental health. The question is how did
someone become so despondent that they'd be prepared to murder their entire
family without anyone picking up on the situation? Trying to introduce
spurious arguments about gun-control is both misguided and unhelpful"
Comments:
Roy Smith
SSAA National Secretary
Mbl: 0408261498
Gun Control News
Moderator: Moderators
Gun Control News
Hehe. That's the best response I've heard from the SSAA. Nice to see they're using reasoned responses to blow the extremist idiots out of the water (oops, no pun intended). 
It's about damn time we started looking at the real reasons we do this to ourselves rather than the minor detail of how it's accomplished. Don't get me wrong, I believe it's damn good thing to stop firearms falling into the control of inappropriate individuals. And I agree most civilian shooters don't need military grade kit. But I get a little tired of constantly hearing of the evils of firearms and weaponry. It's a means to an end. To quote Heinlein: "There is no such thing as a dangerous weapon, only dangerous [people]".
Reminds me of a discussion I had with an anti-gun uni classmate of mine a few years back when there was a spate of terminal home invasions and police shootings. Remember the highlight of them?? A young lad (apparently an innocent darling) smashes his way into some poor b@stards lounge room and gets shot back into the front yard by the home owner. Can't remember where it took place. Now, that's a very serious thing, I personally would hate to be in that situation. Hell, I was worried about the possibility of having to shoot my fellow human beings on active service. It's not something I take lightly.
But my classmate went into great tantrums about how guns kill people. A typical , simplistic statement that these sort of people produce. I think I gave the individual a little too much to think about when I replied that: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people. What are you gonna do, ban people??"
It gets funnier, this individual then makes a broad sweeping statement that if one was to shoot their fellow human beings, one should endeavour to aim for a limb. This was the point where one of my barely human mates sets a challenge. Drags out his paint ball marker (paint ball gun for the uninitiated) gives the complete firearms training package that basic miltary and police receive and conducts an experiment. He ran towards this antigun individual with a stick in his hand, with instructions that he was going to beat the antigunner and they'd better do something about it. Point was made when most shots missed or hit centre of seen mass. A very sobering moment when the antigunner realised it's sooooo damn easy to make assumptions when one is comfortable, safe and well.
Anyone has any other points (disagreement would spark some healthy discussion) to raise??
It's about damn time we started looking at the real reasons we do this to ourselves rather than the minor detail of how it's accomplished. Don't get me wrong, I believe it's damn good thing to stop firearms falling into the control of inappropriate individuals. And I agree most civilian shooters don't need military grade kit. But I get a little tired of constantly hearing of the evils of firearms and weaponry. It's a means to an end. To quote Heinlein: "There is no such thing as a dangerous weapon, only dangerous [people]".
Reminds me of a discussion I had with an anti-gun uni classmate of mine a few years back when there was a spate of terminal home invasions and police shootings. Remember the highlight of them?? A young lad (apparently an innocent darling) smashes his way into some poor b@stards lounge room and gets shot back into the front yard by the home owner. Can't remember where it took place. Now, that's a very serious thing, I personally would hate to be in that situation. Hell, I was worried about the possibility of having to shoot my fellow human beings on active service. It's not something I take lightly.
But my classmate went into great tantrums about how guns kill people. A typical , simplistic statement that these sort of people produce. I think I gave the individual a little too much to think about when I replied that: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people. What are you gonna do, ban people??"
It gets funnier, this individual then makes a broad sweeping statement that if one was to shoot their fellow human beings, one should endeavour to aim for a limb. This was the point where one of my barely human mates sets a challenge. Drags out his paint ball marker (paint ball gun for the uninitiated) gives the complete firearms training package that basic miltary and police receive and conducts an experiment. He ran towards this antigun individual with a stick in his hand, with instructions that he was going to beat the antigunner and they'd better do something about it. Point was made when most shots missed or hit centre of seen mass. A very sobering moment when the antigunner realised it's sooooo damn easy to make assumptions when one is comfortable, safe and well.
Anyone has any other points (disagreement would spark some healthy discussion) to raise??
I like to model my myself on the wombat: eats, roots, and leaves.
Excellent point about spur of the moment shots browny. Have never had to make one, but doubt I'd be worried about shot placement in that scenario 
Good post, thanks.
BTW, I'm also pro-gun control, to a point. That point being where the issue goes beyond keeping innocents safe and towards some zealots utopian idea of a world without violence or evil.
Erron
Good post, thanks.
BTW, I'm also pro-gun control, to a point. That point being where the issue goes beyond keeping innocents safe and towards some zealots utopian idea of a world without violence or evil.
Erron